Is the word conservative going the way of the word liberal?

Epicurus said:
I kinda hate it.

If I wanted to hear ignorant, overly-generalized political opinions I would turn off my computer and talk to my friends.

I come here to get my politic fix. I know your reasons are different, but you could at least try to put up a good defense sometime.
Click to expand...

Man, if all liberals were like me, except less spazzy, they'd win every election. :clink:
 
Epicurus said:
Haha wtf?

Oh lord I bet this forum is chock full of Mac/Unix users.

I learned on Windows, so I'm just more comfortable with it.
Click to expand...

I learned on Windows too, I switched in the past week, and honestly, I can't stand using it anymore.

Let's put it this way. Linux boots in under a minute, and since I started using it I haven't had a single crash.

Windows usually crashes when it's booting.
 
If liberalism wants to survive, it's gotta rework itself as a far more individualist philosophy. The fact that the socialists have pretty much abandoned the name makes reclaiming in the future all that much easier.
 
Threedee said:
I prefer to call neocons what they used to be called before so many of them jumped parties - populists.
Click to expand...

??? How ar they populists?

Neocons tend to be socially moderate to liberal, though they really don't care much about these issues.
Populists are socially conservative.

Neocons are warmongers and want to spread democracy via force.
Populists are not really warmongers, though they will beat the drums for xenophobic reasons. They care little about changing other nations.

Neocons favor managed trade for the beneift of the elite and the war machine. This is pretty much there view on economics overall.
Populists are protectionists and are generally retarded on economics.

Both tend to be opposed to civil liberties. That's really the only thing I see them agreeing on. Now the neocons have certainly used certain populists themes (e.g., social conservativism) to their benefit politically.
 
Last edited:
Watermark said:
If liberalism wants to survive, it's gotta rework itself as a far more individualist philosophy. The fact that the socialists have pretty much abandoned the name makes reclaiming in the future all that much easier.
Click to expand...

Without redefining individualism to suit your needs that could be tricky.
 
Epicurus said:
Because it has clearly deviated from its origins.
Click to expand...

LOL. So has conservatism.

The thing about the two party system is that it melds together different political philosophies into the same party. In Europe, the people who wanted socialism called themselves "social democrats", and they now outnumber liberals by about three times on average. In America, socialism had a bad name. So what did the socialists do? They "borrowed" a good name and used it under their banner.

In any case, if modern moderate liberals would stop being so scared of the name, it will undergo a renaissance, just like conservatism did in the 80's whenever they stopped being scared.
 
This just shows you, Epicurus. The worst thing you can do in politics is lend someone your good name.

But that's exactly what conservatives did after the 90's.
 
*sigh*

My facebook wall:

"dude anthony i thought you were an independent why in the world would you go lefty? its all about the right side man haha"


*changes back to moderate*
 
Watermark said:
LOL man.

Liberalism is a proud name in almost every part of the globe except for America.

If the Democrats can kill liberalism, the Republicans can damn well kill conservatism.
Click to expand...
No, the Democrats have a special talent at Phail. You just wait, they find a way to Phail this time too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top